Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Process Boy who wrote (73230)	9/27/1999 1:29:00 PM
From: Charles R	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578127

PB, <Anand reviewed the i820 platform and PIII "B"'s. Da B's are not Coppermines. :-). See how easy it is to make a mistake?> Though I have not read the review carefully, I don't think Anand was mistaking PIIIB and PIIIEB. I think we are talking about CuMine predictions here based on 600B. Chuck

To: Process Boy who wrote (73230)	9/27/1999 6:54:00 PM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578127

Elmer - RE: "I didn't see anything there on CuMine." PB - RE: Anand reviewed the i820 platform and PIII "B"'s. Da B's are not Coppermines. :-). See how easy it is to make a mistake?" I read Anand say something about Cuontimemine and no, I didn't make a mistake. If you check out the review again, you will the PIIIB with the i820 chipset and PC800 DRDRAM provided for a pretty hefty gain in two benchmarks. In NT, the platform which doesn't even exist yet was able to match the Athlon in normal Winstone 99. And in 3D Studio Max, the benchmark in which the Athlon sweeps the floor with the PIII, the PIIIB 600 with its 133MHz bus and DRDRAM was able to get within 8% of the Athlon 600. Prety impressive when you consider the Athlon 600 is about 39% faster than the PIII 600. But don't get all giddy over this. The Athlon is still blows away the P-X in games. An Athlon 500 is comfortably faster than a P-X 600 in games except in Expendeble! And the Athlon is still faster in the BapCo tests (Win98 and NT) and Win 98 Winstone. I said Cuontimemine is actually looking kind of good whenever it comes out because of the PIIIB's performance. It may get better with the faster but smaller cache. Did anyone else notice Anand mentioned 64K when he talked about Cuontimemine's L1 cache? But remember, this platform is so fked up Intel doesn't even have the guts to ANNOUNCE it! In case anyone hasn't read Anand's review, here are a few very selective quotes to give you a summary - "As you can tell by the above chart, there is no need for the i820 platform with the Pentium III B since the Pentium III 600B is a whole 0.3% faster than the regular Pentium III 600 with the 100MHz FSB and 100MHz SDRAM." "...and in this case, the results are very disappointing as the 133MHz FSB + the i820 platform do not even outperform the 100MHz FSB + SDRAM BX** platform." "So subtract the 0.9% performance increase provided for by the simple move to AGP 4X and you get what the i820 platform is offering for gamers. Not too impressive, is it?" "The performance here is beyond disappointing, it's not even worth getting into. The Pentium III 600B is the same processor as the Pentium III 600, but on the i820 platform the performance is generally brought down by the higher latency RDRAM leaving much to be desired from Intel's latest and greatest." And one for you "other" people - "Here's where things get interesting. Under Windows NT, the 133MHz FSB and the faster data transfer rates of RDRAM begin to shine. The Pentium III 600B had no problem pushing aside the regular Pentium III 600 and even brought its business application performance up to par with that of the Athlon 600. The Athlon 600's superior floating point performance kept it in the lead in the high end tests however." PB - Maybe I will call tomorrow, but I have kind of lost interest in the matter. ;)